Case 1602322/2019 · Employment Tribunal
Mr A Royall v Apple Hearing & Healthcare Limited — 2020
- Case reference
- 1602322/2019
- Decision date
- 20 September 2020
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Brace Date
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Mr A Royall
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Brace held on 17 September 2020 that Mr A Royall had been dismissed by reason of redundancy. On that basis, the tribunal found he was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment calculated as 3 years x 1 x £294.00, producing an award of £882.00.
The tribunal also found that Apple Hearing & Healthcare Limited had deducted 4.8 weeks' pay from the claimant's wages without his authorisation, in breach of section 13(1) of the Employment Rights Act 1996. It ordered payment of £1,411.20 for that unlawful deduction. The total amount payable was £2,293.20, and the tribunal noted that the claimant is responsible for any income tax or employee national insurance contributions due on the sums awarded.
Claims and outcomes
2 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Redundancy | The tribunal found the claimant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and was entitled to a statutory redundancy payment calculated at 3 years x 1 x £294.00. | Upheld | — | £882 |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | The tribunal found that the respondent deducted 4.8 weeks' pay from the claimant's wages without authorisation, in breach of section 13(1) ERA 1996. | Upheld | — | £1,411 |
Remedy
Monetary award- Total award
- £2,293
- across all upheld claims
Legal tests applied
1 reference- s.13(1) ERA 1996
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.